tAr, Province of Newfoundland FORTY-FIRST GENERAL ASSEMBLY H OF NEWFOUNDLAND Volume XLI First Session Number 34 VERBATIM REPORT /Hansa.rd.) * Speaker: Honourable Thomas Lush Thursday [Preliminary Transcript] 16 November 1989

The House met at 2:00 p.m SPEAKER (Lushj: Ord r, please! MR. GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial 'Affairs (Mr. Gullage) MR.GULLAGE: Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a short moment to pay tribute to a national athlete who died just recently, victor Davis, A great Olympic swimmer, a gold medalist in the last Olympics, and we pay tribute to this individual who died, as'we know, as the result of a tragic car accident. I would like the House to send a letter of sympathy to his family and to his fiancee'. MR. RIDEOUI: Mr. Speaker. MR..

SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR.RIDEOLJT: Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on this side of the House would certainly like to associate ourselves with the remarks made by the hon. Minister. It was a very tragic accident which took a young Canadian from us who had contributed a tremendous amount to sport and recreation in Canada. So certainly those of us on, this side of the House would like to associate ourselves with the comments made by the hon. Minister. MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker, MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main. MR. DOYLE: Mr.

Speaker, I would ask the House if it would send a message of condolence to the family of the late Anne Morrissey. Mrs. Morrissey, , as the House would he aware, passed away recently at the age of 107 years. She, 1ANl s certainly one of the oldest, if not the oldest individual in o u r Province. I think one of the really interesting t h i n g s about Mrs Morrissey was pointed out today in The Evening Telegram. When St. John's became a self—governing municipality back in 1888, Mrs. Morrissey was a five year old girl living in Avondale - in the home actually of the Minister of Development (Mr.

F'urey) - and my own hometown. So, Mr, Speaker, I think it would be appropriate to send a message of condolence to the family. MR.BAKER: Mr. Speaker. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader. MR. BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We would like to concur with the sentiments expressed by the Member For Harbour Main (Mr. Doyle) . To have lived 107 years is a feat in itself. And she leaves to mourn a large number of grandchildren and great—grandchildren. We endorse the sentiments expressed by the representative from Harbour Main. MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, Li November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 Ri

S MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. John's East Extern. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Mines and Energy. MR. PARSONS: Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask this House of Assembly to send letters of congratulations to a couple of athletes who did very well in world competition. One name in particular is certainly on everyone's mind and that is Joy Burt who won a Silver Medal at the World Championships in Nova Scotia and also tiascol Simpson of Labrador City who won a Bronze Medal.

I think that both of those athletes certainly showed great signs of what their calibre is all about; how they could compete nationally, world wide or whatever. I think certain].y that this House should go on record in sending letters of congratulation to each one of them. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. MR. GIJLLAGE: We too, Mr. Speaker, would like to be included in those letters of congratulations to these two individuals. They compete in a sport that is a very difficult sport to maintain and to stay with, and to continue to be successful with.

Through weight lifting we have been recognized more and more over t h e last few years, and h a v e developed some fine athletes. In both Joy Burt and Mr. Simpson we have done well, by their contribution to the Weight Lifting Sport, and I would certainly like to have us included in that letter to them. Statements by Ministers DR. GIBBONS: Mr. Speaker, on June 29, 1989, I informed all hon.

Members of this House that the Government was proceeding to the implemehtation stage of a maj or proj e.ct previously approved . under the Ca n a d a Newfound], a n d Offshore Development F u n d Agreement, namely, The Mari ne Offs ho re Si rn LI 1 a to r T r a i n :1, n g an (:1 Re s ear c Ii Centre, which is to be estab1isH,d in as sociation with the Marine Institute in St. Johns.

I also announced at that time the awarding of the principal contract for this project involving the supply and installation of the simulation equipment, to a consortium of companies led by KRUPP ATLAS of Nest Germany, an approximate value of ten million dollars. Members may recall that I indicated that this was the lowest bid received for the simulation equipment and that Newfoundland firms were to form a major part of the consortium with forty—five per cent of the work to be directed to twelve local companies led by The Bay Group.

The commitment made by the consortium with respect to Newfoundland industrial benefits was viewed as an important element of the entire project in terms of iii a xi rn i z i n g ]. o c a], t e c h no log y transFer opportunities and strengthening the Province's position to capture Future high tech work of t h i s nature, Mr. Speaker it is with some regret that I must inform the House today that in finalizing the legal docume.nts for t h i s contract, it became apparent that the consortium was not able to fully carry through in a manner acceptable to t h e P r o v i n c e w i t h S .

L2 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 EU

its previously stated commitments it must be pointed out that concerning Newfoundland industrial NOROCO, a Newfoundland company, benefits. I should also advise made a statement of claim on this the House that all efforts to very project because of the tender resolve this matter with the procedure used. The matter may consortium over the past several end up in court depending on how months have proven unsuccessful, things turn out.

Accordingly and following careful consideration of the alternatives Some time ago, this Government available to us, it has been awarded a tender to a company in decided to retebder this the Bay d' Espoir area ot.he rt h a n contract, it is felt that the lowest bidder, based on the retendering is in the greatest fact that locals needed the work public interest, given the large. I am wondering if Government had sum of public funds involved, and given similar consideration to that it also represents the NORDCO in this case.

As Members fairest approach to all companies will know, NORDCO was a company that previously expressed an originally created by the former interest in the project. P.C. Government to capture marine. • related high tech business, If Mr. Speaker, all companies that consideration can be g i v e n to bid on this project have been employment needs in Bay dEspoir, advised of our decision on this then why not do the same in o u r matter, and it is expected that a developing high tech industry, final contract award can be made before Christmas. Thank you. while these delays unexpected are SOME HON.

MEMBERS: disappointing to all of us, I can Hear, hear! assure the House that Governments commitment to the Marine Offshore MR. SPEAKER: Simulator Training and Research Further statements by Ministers? Center project has not diminished in any respect, and that it remains Governments objective to Oral Questions deliver the proj ect in a manner which will optimize the level of industrial and technology transfer MR.RIDEOUT: benefits for the Province. Mr. Speaker, MR. SPEAKER: MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Green Bay. . The hon. the Leade.r of the Opposition. MR. HEWLETT: T h a n k you, Mr. Speaker.

I t h a n k MR. RIDEOUT: the Minister for an advance copy Thank you, Mr. Speaker. of his statement. While I regret delay, I am pleased the Government I have a question for the hon. Lhe is concerned about the degree of Premier. In view of the fact that local content in the Marine the Province and the Government ' of Simulator Project, and I hope they Canada have agreed in principle on continue this attitude in their a number of initiatives to address Hibernia negotiations. However, the present crisis in the fishery, L3 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R3

S and in view of the fact that both Governments are well along, as I understand it, in the process of reaching some final agreement that will perhaps be announced before Christmas, and in view of the fact that the package that is about to be finalized by both Governments will, no doubt, affect thousands of people in hundreds of communities in this Province, would the Premier tell the House whether or not the Province has agreed in principle to remove all part—time fisheririen from the fishery as a result of this pending agreement, thereby putting anywhere from 10,000 to 15,000 Newfoundlanders and Labradorians out of a part—time job which, in many cases, contributed significantly to the annual income of those individuals?

MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker. MR. SIMMS: They have not agreed in principle, okay? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, we are certainly delighted to have that commitment from the Premier. The question was, has there been an agreement in principle to put 10,000 to 15,000 part—time fishermen out oF the fishery forever? And the answer is no! MR. SIMMS: The answer is no, And you do not intend to? PREMIER WELLS: Now, that is something else. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SIMMS: So you do intend to. Now we have him.

PREMIER WELLS: Why not ask the question, then? MR.SIMMS: You just answered it. We do not need to ask it. MR. RIDEOUT: We will follow through on that further. Mr. Speaker, I have a supplementary For the Premier. WoUld the Premier tell the House whether or not the Governments have agreed in principle to remove workers in age brackets 45 years to 55 years from the fishery forever as a result of this restructuring package? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER WELLS: No, Mr. Speaker MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. MR. RIDEOUT Mr.

Speaker, would the Premier tell the House whether or not there has been any agreement in principle between this Government and the Government of C a n a d a so fish processing companies in this Province, after the package is announced, will n o t be permitted to hire young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to work . in the fishery, particularly those who are under 30 years of age? S S L4 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 R4

. . MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER WELLS: I am not sure I followed it. As I understand it, what he said was have we agreed in principle with the Federal Government not to permit fish companies to hire anybody under thirty? No, we have made no such agreement in principle. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Leader of the Opposition. L _RIDEOUT: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Mr.

Speaker, on the issue of part—time fishermen, the issue of taking workers in the 45 years to 55 years age group out of the fishery permanently, the issue of not permitting processing companies to hire young Newfoundlanders and Labradorians to work in the fishery in the future, I want to ask the Premier whether any or all of those issues are under active consideration by the Government of Canada and the Government of Newfoundland at this particular time? MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER WELLS: I do not know what the task forces have discussed, say, in the last ten days, perhaps.

I have not b e e n brought up to date on the details of their discussions in the last ten days. They are meeting on a fairly constant basis. But, I do know that there was discussed all aspects of how this crisis that exists in the fisheries can be dealt with. It is clear that the loss of the allowable catch that is projected is likely to result in a loss of some 6,000 jobs, Where are they gning to be? How can we best cope with it? A whole host of possibilities have been discussed, some of which I personally have not even heard of because the task forces are doing it.

What the task forces have been doing in the last few days I do not know, One of the three the hon. Leader of the Opposition mentioned I do recall being discussed, it has been mentioned, the question of part—time fishermen and how that impacts.

An individual who has a regular job driving a school bus for ten months of the year, is it right to mai ntain a fishing licence and provide for an allowable catch and deprive the fishermen or fisherwoman, who is relying solely on the fishery as their means of income for the whole year, is it right:, to ail ow part—timers in that situation to have access to the fishing and to compete with or affectthe ability of the full—timers to catch fish? That is a question we have to face, and I have no doubt it will be coming up. Has a decision been made in principle? No. I assume that ultimately a decision has to he made.

Has that issue been discussed? Yes, I have no knowledge that either 0.1: the other two issues the Leader of the Op p o s i Lion me n t ion e d ha v e be en discussed, but I cannot say that the task forces have not discussed' i. t MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the I.eader of the Opposition on a final supplementary. MR. RIDEOUT: Mr. Speaker, can the Premier give this House an assurance today that LB November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 RB

those three issues I have raised here today in terms of the fisheries package - first of all, have they been discussed by the Cabinet of this Province and, secondly, have they been rejected as options? MR. SPEAKER: The hen. the Premier. PREMIER WELLS: The answer to both questions is no, Mr. Speaker. MR, RIDEOUT: They have not been discussed and they have not been rejected. PREMIER WELLS: No. If they have not been discussed, they could hardly be rejected. I mean, that sort of logically follows. MR.HEARN: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Since nobody seems to know what is going on, let me ask the Minister of Fisheries (Mr. N. Carter) if the Member for Carbonear (Mr. Reid) was enunciating Government policy yesterday when he said, 'If plants cannot make it on their own, let them go, ' despite the fact that the Minister has recently propped up one in his own district while letting four or five others die which affect other areas of the Province. Is t h i s the policy of the Government, to let them go if they cannot make it on their own? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. N. CARTER: Mr.

Speaker, private Members do not speak for Government, do not articulate Government policy in this House. SOME HON, MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's -. The Capes. MR. HEARN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That is the type of answer I expected to get, so I ask the Minister is the Government, then, without consulting private Members who make up their own party, not to say Members who represent sb many rural districts in the Province, coming up with policies that will directly affect these people, including the Member for Carbonear, the Member for Placentia (Mr. Hogan) and the Member for St.

John's South (Mr. Murphy) , without any consultation at all? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. N. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, one of the advantages of being a private Member in the Liberal Party is they are given the right to express certain views, private views, personal views, and are not told what to say or when to say it. I repeat what I said a moment ago, that a n y statements by the .Menber For Carbonear certainly were his own, he was not speaking for Government. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! [1 . L6 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R6

• MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for St. Mary's - The Capes. MR. HEARN: Mr. Speaker, then let me ask the hon. Member, in light of the • answers given to my colleague, the Leader of the Opposition, by the Premier, is this Government, under a veil of secrecy, developing poliicies and supporting policies that will see the closure of several plants in this Province, affecting several hundred jobs and closing markets that cannot be replaced for many fishermen, including the plant in St. John's South, where we are not only talking about plant workers, but a market for several hundred fishermen?

Are they developing policies that will see those plants close, those jobs destroyed, without any input or consultation from those who are • directly affected, the people of this Province? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fisheries. MR. N. CARTER: Mr. Speaker, the answer is no. When it comes to consultation, the hon. Member might do well to read the newspapers and he will find that we just completed a series of twelve meetings around the Province, all parts OF the Province, where we consulted with the fishermen, MR. TOBIN: When were you on the Burin Pen ins Lila? MR. N.

CARTER: We were on Burin Peninsula - maybe he can ask ne the question after, Mr. Speaker, and I will answer it. But certainly it is not our policy to destroy plants.. Our . policy, Mr. Speaker, is to develop a program and policies that will see the fishery reinstated in a healthy state, one that will give people engaged in it a chance to make a decent living for themselves MR. NOODFORD: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Huiiber Valley. MR. WOODFORD Mr. Speaker, rriy question is to the Minister responsible For Forestry and Agriculture (Mr. FLight).

It is con c cmi ng the Sawmill e rs Assistance Program that was instituted some three years ago. One of the main proponents of that program was the NLPA, which is the Newfoundland Lumber Producers Association in the Province. It was a program that was very successful. It had nothing to .do with political patronage, it had nothing to do with seventeen years in power, it had nothing to do with certain Members on this side of the House or the other side of the House.

In view of the fact that the Sawmi.11ers Assistance Program is so vital to the sawmillirig industry in the Province, and in view of the fact that the sawmillers in the Province depend heavily on this program to build up their inventory for the up c o ml n g s e. a s on, would the Minister te..l 1 the House if and when that program will be instituted for the upcoming season? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Fores try and Agriculture. MR. FLIGHT: 1-7 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R7

. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the hon. Member for his question. The answer is the program will be announced shortly. It is an improved program over what the sawmillers got prior to this year. And he is right, it is an excellent program, well received by the sawmillers in the Province. Very shorti.y the Government will announce its 1989 Sawmillers Assistance Program. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley. MR. WOODFORD: A supplementary, Mr. Speaker. Concerning the program, I know the last program was up for a three year period.

Could the Minister tell me why you had to wait so late for the program to be approved? I am getting calls. I would say that Members on both sides of the House are getting calls concerning the program, and they are in limbo. Even the NLPA is in limbo with regard to whether the program is goin to be instituted or not. It is very vital to the rural fabric of our society in this Province, a n d a successful program. If the program is going to be improved, I commend the Minister, no doubt.

But would he like to tell the House if the results of the survey being done by the Department of Forestry would have any bearing on whether that program will be approved or not? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. MR. FLIGHT: No, Mr. Speaker. The results of any survey done within the Department of Forestry have no direct bearing on whether the program would or would not be approved. As I told the hon.

Member, the Government's program will be announced shortly and the sawmillers will be, I think, very receptive to the program, As to his question as to why it has been delayed so long, I can simply say to him, Mr. Speaker I do not know if other Ministers found this - that I have been so busy trying to straighten up things I inherited, we finally got around to it, Mr. Speaker. In dealing with some of the mess that was left around a n d some of the programs, we finally got around now to developing a good Sawmillers Assistance Program, MR. NOODFORD: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: The hon. the Member For Humher Valley. MR. W000FORD: I can assure the Minister that the Sawmillers Assistance Program certainly was not one that was in a mess, It was a successful program. - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hearl MR. NOODFORD: It was a motherhood issue in this Province. All the Minister had to do was simply sign on the dotted line, giving the sawinillers in this Province the right to access not grants, not a giveaway, but a loan that they can put in place and pay back - a 95 per cent payback - one of the best programs that was ever instituted in that Department.

So there is no excuse for that. . [1 L8 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R8

I Apart from question, Mr. Minister. Is considering responsibility over to the unions? that, one last Speaker, to the the Government passing the for this program banks and credit not have to tell the Minister or any other individual in this House that the banks in this Province, or in Canada, have no social conscience when it comes to dealing with the rural fabric of this Province. C MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture. MR. FLIGHT Mr.

Speaker, this Government is considering all options that will make the delivery of Government programs more effective to the people who receive them. By the way, I talked to the sawmillers and the sawmillers' representative, and there is no concern that the program has not been delivered at this time. The concern might he whether or not it will be delivered. SOME HON. MEM8ERS: Hear, hear! MR. FLIGHT Mr. Speaker, I want to put the Members concerns at rest. In the very near future the Sawmillers Assistance Program will be announced and it will be as acceptable as it every was and maybe more acceptable.

MR. kJ000FORD: A final supplementary, Mr. Speaker MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Humber Valley with a final supplementary. MR. OODFORD: The Minister said they are keeping all options open. I just hope one of them is not to pass it over to the banks and credit unions. I do 1-9 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR._NOODFORD: I would submit to the Minister not to even think about it. It is a successful program, keep it in the Department it is in so that they can show flexibility to the rural parts of this Province..

I ask the Minister, when he is considering whether to go to the banks or to the credit unions, for Gods sake do not take something else away from the rural areas of this Province and put it to the conglomerates, the B a n k s of Montreal and so on? SOME HON._MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Forestry. MR. FLIGHT: Mr. Speaker, the Member need have no concern about the Sawmillers Assistance Program. As I told him, it will be announced shortly and he will be very pleased with it, as will the sawmillers.

However, I should say, since he is asking me if I am considering this and considering that, that the fact is we a r e considering everything that improves the forestry and maximizes the benefits to the economy from the forestry resource, and we w:ill even look at improving the Sawmillers Assistance Program. MR. DOYLE: Mr. Speaker. No. 34 R9 [1

I MR. SPEAKER: The hon.the Member for Harbour Main. MR. DOYLE: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question, Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of Social Services, whoever he may be. I guess in this instance it would be the Minister of Health, who is celebrating his birthday today. SOME HON._MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. DOYLE: Having said that, let me see if I can make the Minister's day as happy as possible. The Minister will be aware, Mr. Speaker, from his visit last week to the St. John's Youth Center in Torbay, of the absolute horrible conditions that exist in that building.

You presently have nineteen boys and six girls, between the ages of 14 years and 18 years, young offenders, who are serving terms of between one month and three years, housed at that Youth Center. The staff at the Center, as the Minister will be aware, is on the edge of a nervous breakdown because of conditions that exist there; they feel that they are in grave danger. The institution, Your Honour, is not getting the proper guidance or supervision. Water is com:Lng down through the ceiling of that building.

I want to ask the Minister right now if it is the intention of Government to keep these young people living under these horrible conditions, or will Government do the decent and very humane thing and have these young people immediately moved to decent habitable living quarters, with proper supervision? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. gentleman for remembering my birthday. It always seems that for some reason undesirable things happen to me on my birthday, and I see this birthday is not going to be an exception, Mr. Speaker; I am going to be harassed.

As the Member says, I did visit the Youth Center, Mr. Speaker. It is not something I would want to see made into a politi:al football, but I - SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. DECKER: - was not the least bit impressed with what I saw when I looked at the building. I was impressed with the dedication of -€ he staff, and I think it is unfair for the Member to even suggest. that the staff are not doing their work. They are working under very trying circumstances, and they should he given credit for what they are doing. There should be no suggestion by the Member that the staff are somehow responsible for this. Mr.

Speaker, the building was not: built to be a remand center or an ins titution to ke.ep people in, w h i c h is really, as had as t h e word may sound, a prison for children. That is the unfortunate thing. These things are. never attractive. They are not hom.es. Basically, they are prisons for children. There is a leak in the roof. There were some pipes broken, and there were holes in the ceiling while I was there. It ci: ci: L10 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 RiO

. . is not a nice place. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member will be pleased to know that the Department of Social Services and the present Government have plans to alleviate this problem once and for all. The Member will know that construction is started on the new youth center in Whithourne. There are plans, Mr. Speaker, for some remand centers in various places throughout the Province, in Labrador and Western Newfoundland and on the East Coast.

I suppose the short answer is, it is not a place we want to keep open, but it was just impossible to build a suitable building in the last six months that we have been in power. It was something that we inherited, and we are trying to address it as fast as we can. I would certainly hope that in a very short time we can have a place for that element of society. There is an awful lot of concern in this Government because we do have a conscience. We do have a lot of concern for those people, but we cannot blame it on the staff, and I do not think the Member should do that. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main, MR. DOYLE First of all let me say, Mr. Speaker, that nobody is blaming the staff. I want to get that straight and on the record. Is the Minister not aware, Mr. Speaker, of the grave seriousness of this particular problem? Is he not aware of thegrave morale problem that exists and the strain Lii November 16, 1989 vol XLI that both the staff and the young offenders are under down at that facility? Maybe the Minister would like me to table for him, as I will, some pictures of what is going on down there, and the condition of that building.

It would not be a very nice birthday present for the Minister. Is the Minister aware that a staFf member was recently beaten up down at the youth center? And in spite of repeated attempts, repeated requests to have interviews done with the staff, requests that were made to the Minister .- the current or the previous Minister of Social Service .- to have interviews conducted with the staff down there, the Minister did not accede to that.

I would ask him if he would have interviews done with the staff down at the Youth Center so that he can hear first—hand the problems that these people are having, because the Minister of Social Service would not do it. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I will tell the hon. Member something I will not do, I will not panic . I will not enter into crisis management. There is a problem there. As to the staff being beaten up, I am not sure which specific incident the hon. Member is referring to.

It is not a daily happening, but in such an institution it is not uncoimnon for staff to be, as the hon. Member says, beaten up. There were some incidents recently where some of the residents had to be restrained. That building 43 was not designed to have a place so that residents could be restrained, so some of them had to be taken back to the Remand No. 34 . RU S

. Center, Mr. Speaker, which is designed, for that, it has a place where you can lock them up. I should caution the Member that this is a very serious matter. As to interviews, I would have to take that under consideration. I do not want to see this becoming a big political issue. I can assure the hon. Member that our concern is with the residents of that institution. We have a problem in our society, and we are trying to address it. But we are not able to wave a magic wand and have that building replaced tomorrow.

As soon as it is possible we hope to have a new building which is more in keeping with the 20th century. We inherited that building and we are trying to deal with the problem, Mr. Speaker. But we are not magicians. It takes a little bit of time for us to do it, and the hon. Member knows that. But we are attempting to overcome the problem, which was thrown in our laps by the hon. Member, MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Harbour Main. MR,DOYLE: I would say to the Minister if it was not serious we would not be bringing it up here today. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR.

DOYLE: It was t h i s Government who made the decision to build the Whitbourne facility, which ' will not be ready for at least two years. So that is why we want the Minister to do something about it now, Is he aware that offenders at The Youth Center who are sentenced and are serving anywhere between one month and three years, serving terms for anything from break and entry to sexual assault, are being mixed in and taken to the Pleasantville Remand Center where you have young offenders who are awaiting their day in court? People are taken , From the Torhay Youth Center or the St.

John's Youth Center, and housed in with the people at The Pleasantuille Remand Center, who may or inay not be guilty. . Does that bother him at all? And what measures is he taking to address that particular pro ID 1cm? MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, the hon. gentleman raised an example which does bother me very much. He.refe.rs to it as the people who are serving sentences for, in some ces, what could be very severe crimes, who are mixed in with people who are waiting for a day in court, people who have been remanded.

This concerned me very much, and on my visit, I drilled all the people who are working there: Just what is involved in this . remand? Who is t h e person and why is he there? Is he not being treated unfairly? Is he not innocent until proven guilty? What I have been told, Mr. Speaker, and I believe, the persons who are remanded to this centre are innocent under the law, but they a r e repeat offenders, they are people who, in the opin'ion oF a judge, have to be kept in custody for their own protection as well as for the protection of society, in some cases.

So, it is not a simple matter of going and getting some innnocent little young fellow who goes out L . L12 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 . R12

S . and lets the air out of some tires, and putting him in the Remand Centre to be mixed him in with people who have been convicted. That is not what is happening, The people who are being remanded are people who have already comrritted crimes a judge considers so serious that these people should not he on the street until they have their day in court and are judged.

They are not sent there because some social worker or the Minister of Social Services think they should be put there, they are there because some judge has said that it is important for those people to be there, The hon. member raised a point which concerned me personally and concerned a lot of members, as it concerned the Minister of Social Services very much, Mr. Speaker, and that is that innocent children are mixed in with convicted offenders. But it is not quite that black and white. They are there bec&use a judge says they should be there.

That decision is made, and if there is any erring it is on the Conservative side. I am sure all people who are charged are not sent there, but the ones who could be a danger fo themselves or to society, are sent there. MR. SPEAKER: The hon, the member for Port au Port. MR.HODDER: Mr. Speaker, a question to the Minister of Health acting as Minister of Social Services. I noticed the Minister said the centre was not a nice place, and he would not enter into crisis management. But, I say to the Minister, he had better enter into some kind of management.

In light of the fact that no guidelines exist for youth correctional workers in the handling of the more aggressive residents, is the Minister aware that youth workers when physically attacked cannot respond because of fears of charges of assault? Is he aware that if a youth worker is charged with assault, that youth worker is then suspended until proven innocent? Will the Minister take action to see that better , guidelines are put in place to protect both the youth workers and the young offenders? would he not agree, and this is the case here, Mr.

Speaker, that there is a complete breakdown of management and control in that centre? And would he not agree that something should be done about this? MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. MR. DECKER: Mr. Speaker, I am not capable of remembering all the questions the hon. gentleman asked, so maybe he should put them on the Order Paper.

However, I should point out to him that people who work in this institution are not told, nor are they encouraged, to physically beat up on the people who are staying there, If this is what the hon. member is suggesting, that is not in keeping with the way in which we treat people in this day and age. We do not order, we do not ask or advise the workers to physically beat up the children who are staying there. That is not our intention, and we are not going to do it. IF the hon. member is suggesting that., I would suggest he is suggesting it to the wrong people. Mr.

Speaker, we are talking about a youth centre, which is a euphemism for a jail for 1-13 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R13

. children. It is not a pretty place. It is not a place I would want to visit very often, but someone has to. Mr. Speaker, we are trying to approach this in a Liberal way. It is a problem which has developed over the last seventeen years. It might take us a few months to deal with it, but we are attempting to deal with it. The people who work there, a lot of them are experienced people. Some of them are trained in social work. They are doing the best they can. I am not aware of any management crisis. But if there is a management crisis, we certainly will take that under review and address it.

As a matter of fact, Mr. Speaker, I was extremely impressed with one of the managers who took me through the institution, so much so, that I told him I would not want to have his job, but that he is doing a tremendous job under very trying circumstances. Hopefully, shortly• we will be able to give those people some decent buildings to work in. I do not know if I missed any of the questions. If I did, I ask the hon. Member to put them on the Order Paper and I will try to address the ones I missed. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Member , for Port au Port. MR. HODDER: Mr.

Speaker, I would just like to say to the Minister that nobody is suggesting that anybody is beating up on anybody or that anybody should beat up on anybody down at that centre. The problem here is not beating up on people. There is a crisis in management at that centre and the Minister should know that what we have here is a complete breakdown of the system, where people lack the right guidelines on how to handle these young people.

I ask the Minister, in light of the fact that it seems from hi.s answers to previous questions that it will be two years before this situation IAIlll c h a n g e e:nd t h e Whitbourne facility is open, will the Minister not try to find alternate facilities, especially in view of the conditions down there, the lack of space, etc. and I think the Minister glosses it over.

In light of the fact that youth who are in for minor offences are being mixed in with youth who are in For major offences, and that does not do the youth of this Province any good; they are supposed to be there to be reformed and not to he hardened, I ask the Minister is he intending to find alternate accommodation . before the Whitbourne facility is open? MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Minister of Health. Mr. Speaker, the hon. Member will know that that is impossible, ns he pointed out, it will take up to two years to build a centre at Whitbourne .

So the hon Member will know that we cannot go down and put another building next to building No, 43 immediately. . But the hon. Member will he pleased to know that we are doing renovations to that particular building. While I was there, I saw that one particular wing had been closed down and there were carpenters there doing renovations on the building. So it is an ongoing, daily thing which we have been desperately trying to do. The . C L14 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 R14

I Minister of Social Services was involved in it while he was there, and we are trying desperately to get it. But carpenters can only work so fast. The decision has been made, the will is there, the building is now being renovated. But the hon. Member may not be painting an accurate picture. In the recreation room, Mr. Speaker, the walls are beaten up, where the residents have been playing floor hockey. My first impulse was to think that those people were being reckless, But I am quite certain - MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, on a point of order MR. SPEAKER: A point of order.

MR.SIMMS: This Minister has totally and absolutely abused Question Period. He totally and absolutely ignored your lecture earlier today, and is trying to be a smart aleck - a big grin over there, a big smile. The fact of the matter is, Oral Questions have expired anyway, Mr. Speaker. I just cannot sit and listen to any more. MR.BAKER: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader. MR. BAKER: To that point of order, Mr S pea 1< er. I agree that things are a little bit different from what they should be. The Member for Port au Port (Mr.

Hodder) got up and asked, I think, a series of thirteen or fourteen questions altogether, a series of questions L15 November 16, 1989 Vol, XLI that are better suited to the Order Paper rather than to Oral Question period. I would like to point out to the Opposition House Leader that he should make sure he controls Question Period from his side, and the questions asked, a little better than he does, Maybe, then, things will work out better. MR. SIMMS: Why do you not control your side? SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order.

There were a couple of things the Chair was going to reserve until the end of Question Period to elaborate upon, but since the point of order has been raised, I will now do it. There were two things: One, yes, the Minister was taking up too much time in answering the questions with a lot of repetition, and I was about to tell the Minister that, I also want to make the point that in a couple of instances there were three or four questions raisnd, and it was difficult to tell when the questions were answered. Hon.

Members, if they want short answers, should make it a point to ask one question and then the Chair can decide when the question has been answered. By asking double - barrelled, trip 1 c-barrel 1 ed questions, then, of course, it is an opening for Ministers to give long answers , The Chair listens to all the questions and tries to determine when the answers are made; but, yes, the Minister was making long answers, but it was partly due to long questions. No. 34 R15 L

S The other thing the Chair would want to comment upon is the babbling and the bantering that goes on during Questions. That makes it difficult for the Chair, I do not know about others, to listen to the question and to the answer. So I would ask hon. Members, as well, to please refrain from the babbling and the bantering, and that will assist the Chair in making the right decision. Question Period is over. That was the other comment the Chair wanted to comment upon. We do not stop somebody in the middle of answering a question, but Question Period was over. Question Period is now over. The hon.

The Opposition House Leader. MR. SIMMS: I raised my point of order, I believe, at 2:53 and according to the Clerks at the Table, Question Period should have expired at 2:50, so here was an example of the Minister taking three minutes to respond to the question, not only that, three minutes after Question Period had expired.

Now I would like to know: if Question Period is expiring at 2:50 and we are asking a question, would it still be appropriate then not to allow the Minister to answer the question or to cut off the person asking the question, in other words, would Question Period then be over at 2:50, if that was the case. MR. SPEAKER: My experience always has been that if a question is asked then the Minister is extended the courtesy of answering. MR. SIMMS: I have to raise a point of order again, because I think it is important that we know what is going on here.

Either the rules in the Standing Orders are that Question Period lasts for thirty minutes, or those are not the rules, and that is what we need to have clarified.

I am not aware that the precedent necessarily is, and I do not mean to be debating or arguing the Speaker's ruling, but I do want to have clarification for Members on this side in particular, the understanding is, the Standing Orders are, that Question Period lasts for thirty minutes, In this case today, it was 2:53, three minutes after the expiry of Question Period and it would not have stopped then, if I had not got up on a point of order, most likely, so I want to know if the Question Period is thirty minutes or is it extended beyond that, at somebody's discretion or what are the rules. MR. SPEAKER: The hon.

The Government House Leader. MR, BAKER To that point of order Mr. Speaker. The Opposition House Leader is obviously, in a backhanded way, trying to intimate something that the Speaker should be doing that he is not doing. He is indicationg that somehow Question Period went on longer than thirty minutes, the Opposition House Leader knows full well that rulings on the timing and rulings during Question Period are the sole prerogative of the Speaker and the Speaker is in sole control of Question Period and of declaring when Question Period is over. I would also like to point out, Mr.

Speaker, to you, that in S S L16 November 164 1989 vol XLI No. 34 Rio

C the four years that I have been in the House, Question Period has always ended, always, absolutely in every single instance, at the end of an answer to a question, so that Speakers have consistently handled Question Period in this House that way, and that has been the custom in this House Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker,now I will not allow the hon.Government House Leader to suggest that somehow I am giving you a backhanded slap, because I had no intention of doing that. But it is important that we clarify the rules.

What the House Leader has said with respect to your experience of four years may very well be so, but I do not believe, if we accepted that as the practice for all the time in the future, that a Minister, if he happens to be answering a question, should be allowed to go on for three or four minutes beyong the expiry. That is what happened today, and that is the point that I am trying to make. Usually there is a courtesy extended if a Minister is in flight and answering a question and the Speaker or somebody would say you have only got a few seconds to finish.

But this Minister callously threw out the rules and went on. Now the other point I want to make is this Mr. Speaker, with all due respect, it is not the Speaker's responsibility to decide when Question Period is over, we have that in our rules and our Standing Orders now, and thirty minutes is the time allotted for Question Period and that is what the rules say. Now if we go beyond the rules, it has to be by agreement Mr. Speaker, I submit, and that is the only point I am making, and I think the matter is serious enough today to raise it so that we can all be aware of it in the future.

I would certainly accept responsibility for Members on this side, in developing their questions, to try to do it in a proper fashion, yes, but surely, Ministers on that side of t h e House, particularly some of them, and particularly some- they are not all the same .- but somE, one or two in particular, a b u s e the Question Period and that is not fair for Members who want to ask reasonable questions. MR.__SPEAKER: The hon. The Government House Leader. MR. BAKER: Thank you Mr. Speaker.

We realize that a Minister should not go on too long at any time during Question Period and more especially at the end, However, that matter has been dealt with, Mr. Speaker, by yourself. In terms of what happened today in Question Period there were, I would suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, a lot more than the three or four questions that you alluded to. I counted quite a Few more than that in the question, and the answer was necessarily long.

I would like to point out to the Opposition House Leader, and to you, that this side believes that the Opposition House Leader, knowing the rules of procedure and the rules of the House so well, I believe this is the third time he has got to his feet in the last ten minutes on a point of order, the first two obviously were not points of order and I would suggest to you this is not either. MR. SPEAKER: L17 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No, 34 Ri?

Paper, I believe, there appeared for the first time a question about automobiles assigned to the Premier's office. There were four questions. The first one was, how many publicly owned vehicles have been assigned to the Premier's office in St. John's and in any other a r e a of the Province? The answer is there are two vehicles on permanent assignment to the PremUer's office at the present time. An additional two vehicles, one was the car that the full—time chauffeur - bodyguard used to drive the former Premier Peckford around in.

That is used now as a V.I.P. car and it will be run out of the Ministry of Works, Services and Transportation. Occasionally, when it is necessary for me to be driven anywhere as Premier by somebody, as. occasionally it is necessary, a car from the motor pool will be used for that purpose, and in all probability that car. That car and a car, that had been formerly assigned to the Premier's Parliamentary Assistant in the former Government, got inherited automatically without my even knowing it, I only became aware of it recently.

My Parliamentary Assistant was given these keys and told- here, these belong to the Par' 1 i a [Ti e n-tar y Assistant to the Premier. AN HON. MEMBER: You did take them back to the (inaudible)? To the point of order. I would suggest that my understanding is that all matters related to the Question Period are decided by the Speaker. When I am talking about the thirty minutes I do not think ever we could answer is it thirty minutes? It has never been that way. There is some leeway.

To do that we would have to say that the Question Period could not be thirty because the Speaker would have to decide, when the question has been asked in twenty—nine minutes, that there is not time for an answer, and cut the Member off at the twenty—nine minute mark and say there is not time for the question. We try to keep it within the thirty minutes. There is no question, as I said today, and I will say again, the Minister was speaking too long, and without the point of order, the Chair would have stood in it's place.

I have nothing new to say other than what I said before and will ensure that in the future Ministers try and keep their answers short, as well as hon Members asking a particular question. Before we get into the next item I would like to welcome to the galleries today a visitor from Labrador West, Mr. Alonzo Drover who is presently the President of the Labrador Nest Caribou Hunters Association. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Premier. PREMIER_WELLS: Mr. Speaker, on yesterday's Order PREMIER WELLS: I most certainly did. AN HON.

MEMBER: It was the Minister of Finance's. PREMIER WELLS: Well, whosever car it was, it was a car that - the Parliamentary Assistant in the former Administration was assigned. The L18 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R18

a Parliamentary Assistant in this Administration inherited and used that car uiithou my knowledge for some considerable time, and as soon as I became aware of it I put an end to the practice immediately. The answer, Mr. Speaker, is there are two cars. MS VERGE: What about, the one in Corner Brook (inaudible. ) PREMIER WELLS: It is his own car. He purchased a new •car some time ago, a month or two ago. There was a car in Corner Brook. There were two cars in Corner Brook that were being put on the auction block. MR.SPEAKER: Order, please! Again, I must interrupt.

The Premier was answering a question and the very thing that I alluded to in Question Period, somebody came out and asked, how about another? The Chair is not going to tolerate that. The Premier is answering a question and I ask the Premier to answer the question as on the Order Paper. PREMIER WELLS: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There were four questions on the Order Paper. The second one is: provide the names of the individuals to whom the vehicles referred to in (

a) have been assigned? The name of one individual is Clyde Wells, and that is one that I drive. It is a shorter wheel base car than that big monstrosity that was there before .because I cannot get out 'ny driveway in the big one. And the second one, Mr. Speaker, was a four-wheel drive car that 1-19 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI was assigned to the Premier, and I do not remember whether it was the Premier or the Premier's wife that used to drive it formerly.

It is a four-wheel drive Blazer vehicle, and that is now used generally in the office when it is necessary for somebody in the office to go somewhere on public business. That car is used for that purpose. We also decided, Mr. Speaker, that it might be wise to keep it, because it is four-wheel drive, and it may be advantageous in the winter. So there are those two cars, the one I drive personally and that one. The third question was: provide the position and title of each individual referred to in (h)? The first individual is Clyde Wells, and his position is Premier; the second is no specific individual.

It has been on occasion driven by special assistants in the Premiers Office, a parliamentary assistant, other staff in the Premier's Office and the Clerk of the Executive Council, Mr.. Stanley, has on occasion driven it as well. So it is used by both the Premier's Office and the Cabinet Secretariat, the Executive Council. The fourth question is: Have any of the vehicles referred to in (

a) been purchased since May 5, 1989? If so, provide a list of such vehicles and the purchase price. Indicate whether or not public tenders were called. And whether or not the tender was awarded to the lowest bidder, So there are three or four parts to' that question. The first

part is; the vehicle was assigned to me. It was purchased, I think, in October, :1 am not sure which, it is since May anyway, but probably is sometime in October, I believe. No. 34 R19 C

The second part of the question is; the price was $22,334.35. Then there would have been Provincial sales tax which would have come back to the Treasury on top of that. The third question is invitations to tender were sent to nine automobile dealerships in Newfoundland. And the fourth part of the question is: the tender awarded was to the lowest tender that met the specifications. I think there were four tenders that did not meet the specs. But it was the lowest tender that met the specs. I can provide a written

summary. MR. BAKER: Mr. Speaker. a.SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader. MR.BAKER: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise to provide an answer to a question that was raised on Tuesday by the Opposition House Leader (Mr.

Simms), " my question to the President of Treasury Board, does the present Government intend to follow the commitment of the previous Administration to find a way to put this program, that is the health care thing, the early retirement in place for health care workers?" And I gave an answer, I am just about to explain now, that I thought was rather good, but it did not satisfy the Opposition House Leader and he waved around a document. He indicated it was a Treasury Board, Cabinet Secretariat one. And he said this concluded that it would be feasible to extend the program to the health care sector.

And there was advice from Treasury Board officials there and so on. And that he suggested that the current President of Treasury Board read it. And he asked the question how can we tell them that they are still going to have to pay for the plan? Now, Mr. Speaker, I could not answer that question and I indicated that I could not. And my understanding is that everything that the Member opposite said was not true. I now since have researched the document and I can now answer the question for the hon. Member. MR, SIMMS: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.

SPEAKER: A point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader. MR, SIMMS Now, Mr. Speaker, here again we see an occasion where the Government is trying to beat around the rules. I think if Your Honour would take the time to do some research this matter has come up in the past, risen or raised in the Legislature, my recollection is, by Members on this side of the House some time during the past three or four years. I am sure the Clerks will be able to help you in the research.

There is very specifically a rule that talks about answering questions under the heading Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given. Now, Mr. Speaker, in this case I am absolutely certain the President of Treasury Board dd not indicate in his response to my questioning the other day that he was taking notice of that question. No where did he indicate that. He is now simply . S [1 1-20 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R20

. a hoping that I will ask him another question so he can answer it. Since I did not today, of course he is trying to bend the rules as best he can to somehow try to say something about this particular issue. Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not care about the answer. I do not mind listening to the answer or anything else, But it is very important again for the rules, and I am surprised that the Premier, an individual who pretends he thinks so much of Parliament and the use of the rules in the Parliament and everything else, is there counselling his House Leader. Counselling him! I am sure he is counselling him.

Now that is wrong and the Premier should know it is wrong. Mr. Speaker, I submit to you that before this matter is agreed to today, because I certainly do not believe it was given notice, and there is no urgency in getting a response today, he can give it tomorrow if Your Honour so rules, I would ask that Your Honour take this matter under advisement, consider it, and let us set the rules straight so that there is no trickery played by anybody on either side of the House. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader. MR. BAKER To that point of order, Your Honour.

It has been the practice in this House that when questions are asked during Question Period - if Your Honour checks back he will find many examples especially when a document is used that is not subsequently tabled by the person asking the question, when a document is used that the person to whom the question is asked does not have immediate access to that document, and the question was asked concerning information in that document, that at the next opportunity, once the Minister has had a chance to have a look at the document, he can then sensibly respond to the question. Otherwise, Mr.

Speaker, this would make a complete sham of Question Period. The purpose ' of the Opposition House Leader asking the question was to elicit information. I dd not have the document in front of me that he was referring to, that contained the information. If he honestly wanted to elicit information from me about that document, then he would not object to me now giving the information he asked for, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The Chair, will take that under advisement for a little while this afternoon.

The normal procedure, obviously, for Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given, is precisely that, for which notice has been given. It has been customary in the House, in the meantime, over the years that I have been here, if a Member felt a question was not answered satisfactorily that he would get up in this period and generally, by-Jeave, answer the question. In this particular case, the Minister has the option of making a ministerial statement as well.

The Chair will take it under advisement and rule on it, but it is the custom, for this particular item, to give notice, obviously, or ask for leave of the House to do it. The Government House Leader has not asked for leave, L21 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R21

and maybe he will want to do Act Respecting The Department Of that. That is up to the Works, Services And Government House Leader. Transportation.' (Bill No. 33). On motion, Bill No. 33 read a Orders of the Day first time, ordered read a second time, on tomorrow. MR. SPEAKER: Motion 1. Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act To Give Effect To The International Convention On The. Law Applicable To Trusts And Their Recognition," .. carried. (Bill No. 30) On motion, Bill No. 30 read a first time, ordered read a second time, on tomorrow.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Justice to introduce a bill entitled, "An Act Respecting The United Nations Convention On Contracts For the International Sale Of Goods," carried. (Bill No. 31) On motion, Bill No. 31 read a first time, ordered read a second time, on tomorrow. MR. BAKER: Motion 3. Motion, the hon. the Premier to introduce a Bill entitled, "An Act Respecting The Economic Recovery Commission." (Bill No. 40). On motion, Bill No. 40 read a first time, ordered read a second time, on tomorrow. MR. BAKER: Motion 5.

Motion, the hon. the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation to introduce a Bill entitled, "An 1.22 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI MR. BAKER: Motion 9. Motion, the hon. the Minister of Forestry and Agriculture to introduce a Bill entitled, "An Act To Revise The Law Respecting The Management, Harvesting And Protection Of The Forests Of The Province." (Bill No. 38). On motion, Bill No. 38, read a first time, ordered read a second time, on tomorrow. MR. BAKER: Order 14. MR. SPEAKER Order 14, second reading of a Bill, "An Act Respecting The Department Of Municipal And Provincial Affairs." (Bill No. 29).

I assume the debate was adiourned by hon. the Member for Burin Placentia West, and it looks as if he wants to carry on again or, in any event, wants to speak to the Bill. The Member for Burin - Plac'?ntia West, MR. TOBIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I most certainly do want to proceed with this Bill, as many of my colleagues will be doing over the next several days, discussing this very important Bill as it relates to the Province. No. 34 R22 .

L L . Mr. Speaker, this Bill gives us the opportunity to discuss in great detail some of the devious methods which the present Government are using to scuttle rural Newfoundland, and now, Mr. Speaker, they have moved in for the kill in the City of St. John's. As one goes through this Bill in detail, you can see where some of the changes are corning about as it relates to municipalities in this Province. We now have the opportunity, as you have said, to go through it in detail, clause by clause, and you can see that the powers of the Minister and the powers of the Department, Mr.

Speaker, will be something if they continue on the course in which they are now headed, if they continue on the course of amalgamation, the course of resettlement that has been advocated in this House by Members opposite. The Minister of Fisheries said today that private Members did not speak for the Government. I certainly hope that is the case in the comments by the Member for LaPoile when he suggested that we resettle the islands in Green Bay.

I certainly hope that when the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs gets up to deal with this Bill, whenever that is, whatever day we move to clue up this debate, that he will clearly give us some indication of whether or not the comments oF the Member for Lapoile are what his Government endorses. And for the benefit of the Minister, and he can see it in Mansard, Mr. Speaker, we talked about the three islands that you are trying to amalgamate. MR.RAMSAY: On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER (Mr. kjalsh): A point of order. MR. RAMSAY: The comments to which the hon.

Member is referring are not on the record. I would suggest that he speak only to comments which are on the record. MR. TOBIN: They are on the record. MR. RAMSAY: That is all, Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: To the point of order, the Chair believes that we may have a disagreement in terms of a misunderstanding of what may or may not be on the record. We will certainly take a look at it by tomorrow, and we can answer for sure then. I think we have a difference of opinion more than anything. The hon. the Member for I3urin - Placentia Nest. MR.TOBIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The record in Mansard will clearly show, and I will have it in a Few minutes, Mr. Speaker, that when I was speaking in debate in this House and I referred to the three islands in Green Bay which they are trying to ama].gamate, the Member for LaPoile clearly stated 'move them' AN HON. MEMBER: Move them. MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, move them, To me, that is going back to the resettlement days. The people in 1-23 November 16, 1989 Uol XLI No. 34 R23

. the Members District, the people who live in LaPoile and other places, Mr. Speaker, will not in any way tolerate that type of commitment, that type of belief and that type of philosophy from the Member for LaPoile. He should be ashamed of himself, representing people in this Pro v i n c e and r C CO fl in e ii di rig that they be resettled, particularly people on islands. MR. HQGAN: He does not know what he is talking about. MR. TOBIN No, Mr. Speaker. The Member for Placentia is right, he does not know what he is talking about and he should not have said it. I agree with the Member for Placentia wholeheartedly.

What he said is right. He does not know what he is talking about, and he should not have said it. And, Mr. Speaker, when we get into not knowing what you are talking about, the Member for Placentia has spoken in this House two or three times and he has proven, as well, that he does not know what he is talking about. But we will accept it from both of them, Mr. Speaker; they are still learning the ropes. And I suspect they are going to cry that they did not know what they were doing when yesterday they voted against a resolution For an all-plants-open policy. The Member for St. John's South (Mr.

Murphy), and the Member for Placentia, as well as other Members over there, will cry one of these days that they did not know what they were doing when they voted against a resolution that was clearly calling upon the Government for an all-plants -open policy, They stood in their places, and it is recorded, and they voted against a resolution to keep municipalities in this Province alive. SOME HON, MEMBERS: Oh. oh! Order, please! I would like to remind hon.

Members that the Member for Bur'in - Placentia Nest has the floor and the Chair is having a little. difficulty hearing what is being said becausé. of some OF c o n v e r s at ion cont i n g f r0Tr1 b o ti sides. I would ask hon. Members to please allow the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West to carry on with a degree of comfort. MR. TOBIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. It is unfortunate you could not hear it, because I am making a good speech. SOME HON. MEMBERS; Hear, hear! AN HON. MEMBER: They are getting rowdy. MR. TOBIN: Probably I should speak louder, Mr. Speaker Mr.

Speaker, let rite say they can squirm all they like, the fact of the matter is, there was a resolution in this House yesterday that would see all plants kept open - That is there. Have you 'jotS a copy of the resolution? I will read it. . . 1-24 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No, 34 R24

. [1 . that would see all the plants kept open, Mr. Speaker. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. TOBIN: Where is it? MR.SPEAKER: On a point of order, the hon. the Government House Leader. MR.BAKER: We are now, Mr. Speaker, in the process of debating Bill No. 29, second - reading of a Bill "An Act Respecting The Department Of Municipal And Provincial Affairs," and I would like to draw the attention of the Member opposite to the rule of relevancy.

I would also like to point out to him that the next Bill that is going to . be called is, "A Bill Respecting The Departi-nent Of Fisheries," at which point I could not invoke relevancy on this particular item. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House Leader. MR. SIMMS: I am pleased to respond to the point of order, the spurious point of order raised by the Government House Leader. I am surprised he would waste the time of the House with this. He might as well get it in his mind that we are going to speak to this Bill, and that we are going to debate matters that we debated under this Bill last day.

There were no interruption last day, no points of order, the Speaker sat there intently listening to everything that was being said, so we already had the precedent on this particular Bill. But I am really glad he raised the relevancy. He used as his reference for Your Honour to consider this matter, the rule of relevancy. He neglected of course to tell Your Honour what it says, and he neglected to read it, but I will read it for you out of the fifth edition. I am sure it has not changed from the s:ixth edition. Page 98 in the fiFth edition says, "Relevancy is not easy to define.

In borderline cses the Merriher should be given the benefit of the doubt." And, Mr. Speaker, not much more needs to he said. This is certainly a borderline case at best, and in that case, certainly the Member from Burin -- Placentia West should be given the benefit of the doubt. There is no point of order, Mr. Speaker. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader. MR.BAKER: Further to the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I thank the Opposition House Leader for reading the rule of relevancy to me. I am quite familiar with what it says. I would suggest to you, Mr.

Speaker, that a full flown debate on the fisheries and fisheries resolutions that were in the House yesterday, do not adequately fulfill the conditions of relevancy with regards to this particular, Act in the Department of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. MR._SIMMS: Mr. Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. Opposition House Leader: MR. SIMMS: A final point, and that is all L25 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R25

will make because there is not Placentia West. much point in - MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! MR. SIMMS: There is not much paint in beating it to death because it is not a very serious point of order in my view. But clearly what is happening in this particular debate, Mr. Speaker, you are talking about a change in a Department that deals with a whole range of issues, one of which is culture. One of which is culture, and certainly talking about almost anything, amalgamation, fisheries or anything else relates to the cultural - historical significance of the people of this Province, and therefore, Mr.

Speaker, the Member was about to t i e .in his argument on the fishery with respect to taxation that communities will not receive, the Government will not receive, the Department of Municipal Affairs will, therefore, not receive and be able to get back to other Municipalities. I mean it is all relative, and surely the Government House Leader should be able to give Members on this side the opportunity to express their opinions, and not be so narrow minded as to try to interrupt every time somebody tries to make a relevant point. MR. SPEAKER Order, please! To the point of order I agree without doubt the hon.

Member for, Buring - Placentia Nest, as many of us have in the House, strayed somewhat from the topic, but I am sure he will tie it in for us very quickly, and we will get back to discussing the Bill at hand. The hon. Member for Burin - MR. TOBIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker, for that ruling. Now let me say, Mr. Speaker, let me get back to my point that irritated the Member from Gander (Mr. Baker) who knows absolutely nothing about the. fisheries, Mr. Speaker. I was saying that there is a need f o r an all-plants-open policy in this Province, Mr. Speaker.

Because if we look at this Bill, rhe Municipalities Act, - AN HON._MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. TOBIN - I have an hour. There is something wrong here, Mr. Speaker. There is something gone astray. SOME HON._MEMBERS:. Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! There is a slight error, please carry on. MR. TOBIN: I knew that I had more time left than that. I have a lot to say here this evening. The point I was trying to make here is that if the plants in this Province or if the Government do not accept an all-plants ....ope.n policy, which the Member from Placentia voted against yesterday, Mr.

Speaker, then where are the Municipalities that depend on the fisheries going to get the taxation? Now, Mr. Speaker, if that is not applicable to what I am saying, and I say it again for the benefit of the Member for St. John's South (Mr. Murphy), "what the resolution said, 'whereas it is vital that any Government . . L26 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R26

• response to this crisis recognizes the necessity to adopt an all—plants—open policy.' Now, when that was put to the floor of this Legislature yesterday evening the man who stood in front of a mike in St. John's last Sunday voted against the all—plants--open policy. In essence, Mr. Speaker, he and his colleagues voted against keeping open the plants in St. John's and that cannot be denied, Hansard will show it. It (All11 be recorded and Hansard will show that that resolution - MR. MURPHY: A polht of order, Mr. Speaker MR, SPEAKER: The hon. the member for St. John's South.

MR.MURPHY: I do not think the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West is • addressing what needs to be addressed. He is definitely misleading the House, If the hon. Member would read the whole resolution then I would concur that he is addressing it, but he did not read the whole resolution. He read a single part of the resolution and he is misleading the House. MR. TOBIN: To that point of order, Mr Speaker. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for t3urin - Placentia West. MR._TOBIN: Mr.

Speaker, I am dealing with the Municipalities Act and the right for councils in this Province to have the right to collect taxes from the fish plants. I am saying that they will be handicapped if there is not an adoption of an all—plants—open policy. If plants close these councils will not be able to a&tract that type of funding. That is the point I am making, Mr. Speaker. I said quite clearly that in part of a resolution yesterday, Hansard will show, that there was a resolution put here yesterday and part of it included an all—plants—open policy.

I spoke the truth and Hansard will show that that resolution that was put to the floor with that included was defeated. MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! To the point of order, arid wii -.h the liberty of the House, I would probably quote Robert Frost's poem, "There Were Two Roads." I have reason to believe that possibly the Member for Burin - Placentia West is travelling a little further down one of the other roads than he should and should probably come hack to the. topic at hand. I have no doubt that the resolution that was put forward on the fishery is in Hansard and hon.

Members in the House know what was said, but I would like to invite the Member to please come back to the road that we are frying to travel. There is no point of order. MR. SIMMS: Just for a moment. 1 believe I heard the hon. the Member for St. John' s South accuse the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West of misleading the House. That, of course, is unparliamentary and I would hope if, Your Honour, did not hear the remarks would at least take it under advisement, check Hansard to see what w a s said, and maybe ask the hon Member to withdraw. 1-27 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No, 34 R27

. 79SPEAKER: ; Chair will take it under advisement. MR. SIMMS: Unless the Member wants to do it now, To that point of order., Mr. S pea k e r. MR.SPEAKER: The hon. the Government House Leader. MR. BAKER: In terms of unparliamentary language, Beauchesne, 6th Edition, Paragraph 490: "Since 1958, it has been ruled parliamentary to use the following expressions." The word 'misleading' is there. AN HON. MEMBER: He said intentionally misleading MR. BAKER: He did not say 'intentionally misleading' Mr. Speaker. I heard him. I listened quite carefully. MR. SIMMS: What page (inaudible)? MR.

BAKER: Well, the Member opposite, believe, has the 5th Edition. MR. SIMMS: No, I have the 6th. MR. BAKER This is on Page 148, From the Debates, April 12, 1960, Page 3175, that word has been ruled as being not unparliamentary or unacceptable. MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Opposition House I_cad er. MR. SIMMS: Mr. Speaker, . it is rather interes€ing that the hon.

House Leader would try to point to one reference, of course, and not point to another reference because in the same 6 t h Edition of Beauchesne, Your Honour, will see on Page 144, Paragraph 489, moving right over to Page 146 that since 1958 it has been ruled unparliamentary to use the following experessions, and included in those expressions is the word 'mislead' on page 146, so he should not try to just simply tell Your Honour that there was only one ruling ever given, there is also a ruling given where misleading has been not accepted and unparliamentary.

So I am sure Your Honour has already addressed it by saying he is going to take it under advisement, so I do not think it is right for us to be questioning Your Honour's decision. MR. SPEAKER: The 'E6n. the Government House Leader. MR. BAKER: I would like to point out to Your Honour, that in the paragraph that the Opposition House Leader refers to, the word 'misleading' is not there by itself. The word 'mislead' and the phrase 'misleading the public' have been ruled unparliamentary. But neither one of these expressions were used Your Honour, simply the word 'misleading' is being obj ected to.

If the Member had said deliberately I misleading then I agree it would have been unparliamentary, but the word 'misleading' is not in itself unparliamentary. MR._SIMMS: Mr. Speaker. . . L28 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No, 34 R28

. 4 . MR.SPEAKER: To the point of order, the hon. the Opposition House Leader. MR. SIMMS: The Government House Leader is absolutely and totally wrong. He should not be telling Your Honour that. On page 146, near the bottom of the page under the list of words that have been used since 1958 and ruled unparliamentary, is the word by itself 'mislead from the Debates, January 18, 1958. Do you see it now? MR. BAKER: What page? MR. SIMM: Page 146. MR. BAKER: (Inaudible). MR. SIMMS: Yes, but the one above that. The word 'mislead', I mean you are playing a silly little game here now Mr. Speaker.

I mean the point is that it has been ruled unparliamentary, as well as parliamentary on occasions, depending upon the context in which it is used. That is not the argument that the Government House Leader gave Your Honour and I think Your Honour should be made aware of that. MR. SPEAKER: To that point of order, the Chair did not hear the comment and I am willing to take it under advisement until I have an opportunity to look at Hansard and make a subsequent ruling from there The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West. MR. TOBIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I am not particularly worried what the hon. gentleman said. I can say, Mr. Speaker, that if precedence is to be set here and we can use the word 'mislead' and 'misleading' in this House it is fine with me. I have the right to use it as well as the Member for St. John's South, if that is the decision of the Chair. MR.SPEAKER: Order, please! The Chair in its wisdom, although it may be somewhat limited, (ices not agree that the words 'mislead' or 'misleading' are appropriate to be used. The Chair simply said that it did not hear the word and will take it under advisement. MR. TOBIN: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Now let me get back to the rights of municipalities, Mr. Speaker, in this Province to be able to collect taxes. Everybody knows that the towns and communities in this Province are basically strickened. The Minister of Municipal Affairs advised the towns and municipalities to raise taxes. I have headlines here somewhere, here is another one, 'Amalgamation Scheme will save the Province $50 million' he says on one day. The next day he tells the councils to raise taxes. Mr. Speaker, the towns and municipalities in this Province need the fish companies, they need the fishery in order to survive.

That is one thing that this Party here, Mr. Speaker, that the Opposition believes in very strongly, that there has to he a 1-29 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 . R29

S strong backbone to rural Newfoundland and urban Newfoundland. We believe that, Mr. Speaker. We believe that in order to ensure that, that all the plants in this Province must be able to stay open. We put a resolution, Mr. Speaker, to ensure that the taxation system for these towns will be kept in place. We put that resolution to the floor. For the record, Mr.

Speaker, I will lust read the resolution: 'WHEREAS it is vital that any Government responding to this crisis recognizes the necessity to offer to have and to adopt an all-plants-open policy.' That was part of a resolution that went to the floor of this House, Mr. Speaker, and the Member for St .. John's South voted against that resolution. Yes, Mr. Speaker, now he is admitting that he voted aga.inst that resolution for all-plants-open and we have a responsibility on this side of the House to ensure, Mr. Speaker, that the people of St. John's South, and the people working in the National Sea Plant in St.

John's South know exactly the position that the Member for St. John's South, St. John's Nest, St. John's North, St. Johns Center, Pleasantville, Waterford - Kenmount, and where ever else. And who ever else went out and tried to scuttle the livelihoods of Newfoundlanders by voting against the resolution that would keep an all-plants-open policy and give the councils the right to collect taxes. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is what I believe in. The Members over there, Mr. Speaker, can squirm all they like. They are on record. In my own District, what is going to happen?

If I could lust relate how heavily my District is depending on the fishery Mr. Speaker, a district heavily depending on the fishery. Burin Plant was closed as a primary processing plant, they lost the tax base there, then there was another move under the utilities taxation with which the Minister would be very familiar. What was that going to do to the people of Burin and the people of Marystown and other places . The people of Burin, Mr. Speal<er, would lose somewhere in the vicinity of one hundred thousand dollars, the Minister of Municipal Affair's is aware of that, under the utility taxation.

They have already been scutted by the closure of the fish plant, this is another one. Marystown and the future of the Marystown fish plant: the town of Marystown, in preparing their Budgets, do not know what to do, Mr. Speaker, they do not know what to do.

They do know, as of yesterday, they have a Government of Newfoundland and Labrador that will not support an all-plants-open policy Every council that is trying to prepare their bugdet for next year in this Province that has a fishery, that depends on fish plants, every community, every town in this Province that is in this situation, had difficulty in preparing their Budget this year, because they do not know what is going to happen.

The only thing they do know is that the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador and all oF the Members that were present yesterday, Hansard has recorded their names, will not support an all-plants-open policy, so we do not know what is happening. Then as all of that rotates, there is another industry in Marystown, namely, the Marystown Shipyard. S 1-30 November 16, 1989 Uol XLI No. 34 R30

L AN HON. MEMBER: Barrett looks after that. MR. TOBIN: What is that? The chairman in Marystown? Now Mr. Speaker there he goes again, represents the St. John's Dock Yard and does not know who the chairman of the Board is, he thought that time that the chairman of the Board of St. John's Dock Yard was chairman of the Board of the Marystowp Shipyard, Hansard will record that, what is he going to say tomorrow, something else. Now Mr, Speaker I would suggest that the Member for St. John's South should say nothing.

He voted against keeping his plant open, now he does not know who the chairman of the Board of Directors in the St. John's Dock Yard is, so he should say very little. Yes, I just told you, Mr. Barrett, Hal Barrett, good man, very knowledgeable in the fishing industry. I have no problems with him being chairman as long as he does not take someone who is very familiar with the shipbuilding industry in this Province. Now Mr. Speaker the town of Marystown does not know what is happening with the fishery. What about the shipbuilding industry?

We do knotAi that the Federal Government will receive a present in the next few months from the Provincial Government of five million dollars because they would not let them subsidize construction of a shrimp trawler in Marystown, we know that, Mr. Speaker. We know that the Ocean Industries agreement is about to expire and which has five million dollars belonging to the Federal Government and which will go back there and which will not be spent.

We do know that they wanted to subsidize the construction of the Marystown shipyard providing lobs for people 1-31 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI who had worked in the shipyard and would be able to pay taxes, build new homes and all that to assist the council, we do know Mr. Speaker that the Government would not permit the construction of the shrimp trawler in Marystown, decided to support Norway instead and sent five million dollars back to the Federal Government. What is that? AN HON. MEMBER: Who advised against it? MR. TOBIN: Who advised against it?

Advised against sending five million dollars back to Norway and building it. Yes Mr. Speaker, indeed I did advise against sending five million dollars back to Norway and advised against building the shrimp, trawler in Norway, it should have been done in Marystouin, I said it then and I say it now, and itis only a Government led by a Conservative Premier that wanted to interfere in the collective bargaining system that prevented . it from happening, and that is the answer, we all know it in Marystown.

We all know Brian Peckford negotiated an agreement and this. man here who is our leader negotiated an agreement for twenty o n e million dollars that you, not you, do not blame you, blame the Premier on that one, that is what happened. And the people in Marystown, what, are they doing, Mr. Speaker, they are doing the same as the people in Long Harbour are doing, the same as the people all throughout the Province are doing, they are moving to the mainland, because of the Government that shows nothing but contempt for the working people of this Province. Now, Mr.

Speaker, we are in this 'Province facing a very serious crisis as it relates to the continuation and No, 34 R 3 1 [1

S the survival of Municipalities. Do not ever kid yourself Mr. Speaker. Where are the people of Long Harbour, where is the council in Long Harbour that had a base, that had a company, that had an industry when we were in Government, Mr. Speaker, how are they going to do their budget this year? Are they going to collect the money from the people who left in the Ryder trucks and the U—Hauls to move to the mainland? Where do they get the money? When they were doing their budget last year, Mr. Speaker, when we were in Government there was a plan there. MR. GILBERT: (Inaudible) MR. TOBIN: Ah, Mr.

Speaker, the Member for Burgeo -. Bay dEspoir (Mr. Gilbert), the old ad on the radio, when we become the Government the Hydro plant will be relocated to Bay d'Espoir. He bought ads in the paper.. MR. GILBERT: (Inaudible) - MR. TOBIN: Where is it, Mr. Speaker? Why did he not deliver on his commitment? That is another broken promise. MR. GILBERT: The Member for Burin - Placentia West (inaudible) MR. TOBIN Yes, Mr. Speaker, and he can shake all of that around he likes, he made a promise to his constituents and he refused to deliver. MR. GILBERT: (Inaudible) MR.TOBIN: No tax base, Mr. Speaker.

Could I have the protection of the Chair please. MR. SPEAKER (Mr. Walsh): Order, please! The Chair is still having a little difficulty picking up on the entire conversation from the hon Member because of some of the comments comnUng from both sides of the House. So if we could hold it just a little bit, please. Maybe the speaker can get on with his point. MR.TOBIN: Yes, Mr.

Speaker, as I was talking about: the rights for municipal councils to be able t,o have industry and collect taxes, I could not help but recall the commitment by the Member For Burgeo - Bay, d'Espoir, the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation. He took out ads on the radio station, CHCM, Mr. Speaker, I think my colleague for Grand Bank (Mr. Matthews) got him recorded where he said, When we become the Government the Hydro plant will remain in Bay dEspoir. He became the Government, Mr. Speaker. I would suspect that that is one of the reasons why they became the Government.

The only reason why the people up there wanted to vote for him was because they knew the decision that the previous Government, the Government of which I was a Member, had made We did n o t c h a n g e our position during the election campaign. But, Mr. Speaker, we did not saturate the voters with hypocrisy. We told the voters, the people of Burgeo -- Bay dEspoir what our decision was. The Member bought a d s and told them what their position was. And, Mr. Speaker, he refused to deliver, he turned his backs on S L32 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 R32

his constituents and now, Mr Speaker - Mr. Speaker, forget that happening. . AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible). MR. TOBIN: Yes, Mr. Speaker, and I would walk out of the House too if I was the Member. Let the record show that he walked out of the House when his District and his constituents were being debated. What about the resettlement program of the 1960s that has resurfaced, Mr. Speaker. Through another name, through another venue, through another devious method of this Government, they call it amalgamation. Let any town in this Province, Mr.

Speaker, or any communities in this Province or towns that want to amalgamate, no problem. But if you saw the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs (Mr. Gullage) on television last night saying that Mount Pearl may be forced into an election in six months. Now, Mr. Speaker, and the Premier says that is right. That is true. MR. WINDSOR: Some chance,. baby! MR. TOBIN Some chance! Some chance! I will submit, Mr. Speaker, to the Premier and to the Minister that it will not happen. And Harvey Hodder, Mr. Speaker, a born and bred Marystowner will not let it happen. MR.WINDSOR: How about that! MR.

TOBIN: 90 is t h e Deputy Mayor, Mr. Speaker, her mother is from Marystown. And if they stick in, Now let me say forced amalgamation is not the right course of action. And they should not let it happen, Mr. Speaker. They are committed as a Government, Mr. Speaker, to forced amalgamation. Do not ever let anyone change your mind, Mr. Speaker, the Premier said the other day, no, the Government will not force amalgamation, but the House of Assembly may I say to the Premier that the House of Assembly will not, because this party here will never be part of Forcing amalgamation.

You will never have our support in forcing amalgamation. Never! Forget about it! Scuttle it! Drop it! You will never have the support of this party in forcing a town or community to amalgamate. It is not there. So your Government might as well (inaudible) as bring it to the House, Premier, because it will not happen here. It will not happen! Now, Mr. Speaker, amalgamation is a devious way for the Premier to revert to the Government of which he was a Member in the 1960s, the resettlement program., when the lives of Newfoundlanders were ruined forever, when the culture, Mr.

Speaker, and the history and the identity of the people throughout Newfoundland and Labrador, were ruined forever. There was one island in my D i s t r i c t - t h e r e were several places, Petit Forte, South East Bight, Monkstown and other places, but I will use this one as an example. There was one island that refused, one place - not an island .- connected to the Burin Peninsula highway, that steadfastly refused to resettle. Not only that, Mr. Speaker, when L33 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R33

the Premier and his Government sent people down to talk to them and tell them they had to be resettled, that they were going to be moved, that they would no longer live in Petit Forte, they said, 'There is the water, and get!' And get, Mr. Speaker, they did. And Petit Forte survived, The .Minister of Fisheries is probably familiar with Petit Forte. It is probably one of the most successful communities in this Province today. The people of Petit Forte, Mr. Speaker, are some of the best fishermen that this Province has ever produced. The Minister of Fisheries (Mr. W.

Carter) , who has travelled the area, I am sure, over the years, and is familiar with Petit Forte, knows full well - and the Minister of Transportation who is from Placentia Bay, as well, knows Petit Forte, too - that these people are the strongest, most capable, most determined group of individuals that you could ever meet. Their determination, their desire, their wishes and their emotional need, Mr. Speaker, to live at home, defied the Government of the 1960s and, Mr.

Speaker, it was with a great sense of pride, probably one of the proudest things I have done as an MHA, was to sit down with my colleagues and sign an agreement with the Federal Government that would see a road constructed to Petit Forte. I take great pride in that, Mr. Speaker, SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear. hear I I think that Federal Government and Provincial Government recognized that rural Newfoundland must continue. But, there was one problem. There was one snag. Tenders were called and the Government of the Day here, Mr. Speaker, were five months from the date the tender closed until they awarded the contract.

And I wonder why? I have my suspicions, Mr. Speaker. Would anyone be surprised if they were to learn that they probably looked at not putting the road there? Would you be surprised if you found out that the Federal Government was adamant that the road was going there? Would anyone be surprised that Mr. Crosie insisted the road be built to Petit Forte? Because, Mr. Speaker, while they held it up for five months, that was Federal Government money that was building the road to Petit Forte, and they still were against putting the road to Petit Forte, Mr. Speaker. And I would suspect that Mr.

Crosbie had to say, 'Listen, fellows and ladies, get that road built to Petit Forte. I would suspect that that was what happened AN HON. MEMBER: Your time is up. Talk about the Bill. MR. TO8IN Mr. Speaker, the Member for Exploits (Mr. Grimes) is now saying, 'Talk about the Bill. Mr. Speaker, that is the mentality that exists over there an isolated community in Newfoundland, a municipality that has a local Government is not considered by them to he worth talking about. I say to the Member for Exploits, and let the record show, Mr.

Speaker, that Petit Forte has just as much right to be discussed in this Assembly as the City of St. John's. And the people of Petit Forte will not take lightly the comments by the Member For Exploits . And do nott hink they will not know what you said. I am talking about the Community . . 1-34 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R34

S Council of Petit Forte, Mr. Speaker, and the Member for Exploits does not want me to do it. Too bad! Too bad! I will continue to do it. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) Petit Forte. signed it to Petit Forte But now they would susr disappoints Exploits, but live with it. give the people of the final $12,000. have water, and I ect that that the Member for so be it. He shall L . MR. TOBIN: There is the urban mentality, Mr. Speaker. Forget about the poor, forget about anybody except those who live in the large centres. Ignore Petit Forte? Not on your life, Mr. Speaker. Not on your life!

Any community that votes 72 to 1 for me, forget them? I promise you, Mr. Speaker, I will forget them all right. I will fight to the bitter end for Petit Forte. I will fight to the bitter end, Mr. Speaker, and will never let the Member from. Exploits interfere with that determination, that drive I have to see the community of Petit Forte - by the way, the Minister of Municipal Affairs is not here. I wish he were, because I want to say something. Do you know what the residents of Petit Forte got last Thursday? They got running water. Yes they did! They got water to their community.

We had been developing it for three years, and $12,000 were needed to hook it up, to put it together. The reason I wish the Minister of Municipal Affairs were here is because he was very, very co-operative in assisting to put that $12,000 in place so they could have their water system. I wanted to say that. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TOBIN: I must say, I met with his 'tafF and with his officials and we put it all together, and the Minister Mr. Speaker, there is no sense in the Member for Exploits coming in here and getting upset with us because the Premier took his car. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: And he told all Newfoundland. MR. TOBIN: That is right. And he told all Newfoundland, 'I took the Member's car. ' Now the Member has his back up against us. Mr. Speaker, when I was Parliamentary Assistant to the Premier, he would not dare take my car. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. TOBIN: I will tell you that. I treasured that car, Mr. Speaker. I treasured that car, It was t h e only car I ever had that-. I really treasured . All the Minis ters were driving around in their old cars rolling down their windows, and I could drive up and press the power button, and blow at them.

AN HON.MEMBER: And it was air conditioned. MR. TOBIN Air conditioning, yes. Mr. Speaker, he took the car from the Member; an old 1982 Chev he took from the Member from Exploits Shame on the Premier! Shame on the Premier for denying the Member for Exploits an old car worth - L35 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 1 R35

MR. DOYLE: AN HON. MEMBER: She burns seventy gallons an hour. What? MR. TOBIN: She was worth, Mr. Speaker, about a thousand bucks. And he goes out and pays $25,000 for a new car and lets the other one, another big Impala, lie up. Because the wheel base was too long, Mr. Speaker, he bought a new one and took the old thousand dollar wreck from the Member for Exploits. If I were the Member from Exploits, that car that the Premier tied up, as we say in boat terms, that big Caprice, get the keys. Get the keys. You have had it for five months now and he did not know anything about it. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear!

AN HON. MEMBER: We will not tell himl MR. TOBIN: If the Member from Exploits works it right, he can have a car for a year. I say that in jest, Mr. Speaker, but for the Premier to take that old wreck - AN HON.MEMBER: There is 160,000 kilometers on her MR.TOBIN: That is right. MR.HEWLETT: Do you have a set of keys? MR. TOBIN: I do not know but I have a set of keys. Mr. Speaker, I will tell you something: He got five months without the Premier knowing it, if he can find another set of keys and get another five months, by that time he will be in Cabinet and you got a car. It is my wish that it happens. MR.

TOBIN: Yes. I established that car, and I am proud of it, too. AN HON. MEMBER: (Inaudible) in Cabinet. Yes, Mr, Speaker, I do wish he goes in the Cabinet. And there are a few more incompetent backbenchers over there I 'wish would go in the Cabinet as well. Now, Mr. Speaker,. I have IS minutes left. Now, I want to get back to the serious part of the bill. I am sorry I got distracted there. My apologies to the House for getting distracted. When the Member for Exploits got sort of irritated because. he lost his car, then I got a little bit carried away, and I apologize.

I want to talk ab )ut things facing this Province as they relate to towns. We know the resolution regarding an all-plants- open policy, including St. John's, has been voted against We know that. MR.GILBERT: Oh, my! MR. TOBIN: We also know that the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation stood in this House yesterday and said the Outer Ring Road will take eight years . We know that, too, Mr. Speaker, MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible). MR. TOBIN: No, no. The Hansard will show it. Will the hon. the Member for St. John's South believe Hansard? r L36 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 R36

I . . Will he believe Hansard? MR. MURPHY: (Inaudible) Outer Ring Road. SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. TOBIN: Mr. Speaker, we intend to deal with the issues of this Province. We intend to show the citizens of St. John's that the Government has sloughed off the Outer Ring Road, that theMinister said yesterday, eight years! SOME HON. MEMBERS: Oh, oh! MR. SPEAKER: Order, please! Order, please! The Chair hates to interrupt the Member while he is on a roll, but, at the same time, it being 4:00 o'clock and Thursday. I would like to advise the House Of the questions that have been presented for the Late Show.

One question represents the fact that I am not satisfied with the answer given to me by the Minister of . Health in today's Question Period re the Grenfell Health Services The second question is: I am dissatisfied with the answer given me by the Minister of Works, Services and Transportation with regard to the Outer Ring Road. And the third question: As per, the Standing Orders I wish to advise that I am dissatisfied with the answer to my question concerning recreation grants asked of the Premier today. The hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West. MR. TOBIN: Mr.

Speaker, I guess I have a couple of minutes left to sum up. MR. WARREN: Only a half hour. MR. TOBIN: Let me say that we h a v e. a Government that has refused to move on the Outer Ring Road; they s a i d it would take eight years. We have a Government, and all of them refuse to support a policy of all—plants—open. We have a Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs who said, raise taxes! We have a Minister who said there will be forced amalgamation. We have a Minister who says - what did he say yesterday? He said the towns will now have to pay for their own recreation. facilities - another discovery!

We have a Department of Fisheries that has washed its hands, as if it did not exist, and turned their backs on the fish plant workers and fishermen and fisherwomen of Newfoundland. We have a Minister of Development (Mr. Furey), Mr. Speaker, a good man, a very capable fellow, but the Premier has taken his powers and given them to Doug House, which is wrong. We h a v e a Minister of Forestry and Agriculture who is only going to support the Linerboard Mill. We have a Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs who is overworked. Now, this is where he will not give up.

The Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs is overworked; it is not possible for one human being to handle the burden that has been placed on that man's shoulders. I would say to the Premier, and I would submit to you, Your Honour, that the Premier should look around his caucus. The Member for L37 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 R37

. Placentia and the Member for Carbonear are itching to get into Municipal Affairs. They are basically competing with one another to become Ministers in Cabinet. The Member for St. John's South: I will tell you something. He would walk over ten miles of •broken glass to get in the Cabinet, but he never will get there. But the Premier should look. Mr. Speaker, can you imagine making the Member , for St. John's South Minister of Fisheries when he will not even support opening his own plant? The Member, Mr. Speaker, for Placentia has a wealth of knowledge in municipal services. AN HON. MEMBER: Who?

MR.TOBIN: The hon. the Member for Placentia AN HON. MEMBER: Has a wealth of knowledge, does he? MR. TOBIN: Yes, he has. He has a lot of knowledge, Mr. Speaker, but he has difficulty expressing it. He does know a lot about councils. As a matter of fact, how could he not have knowledge of councils when he sat on the council for the last term, Mr. Speaker? He sat on the council with my cousin, who is now Deputy Mayor of Dunville. How could he not acknowledge after working with those people?

But let me say that the Member for Carbonear and the Member for Placentia, the Minister of Municipal Affairs should consult with these people before he starts making desperate statements about amalgamation. He should consult with these people because they do know something about councils. They have been around. As a matter of fact, both of them have served as President of the Federation. If my memory serves me correctly, both of them have served. Mr. Speaker, this is important. There is a Minister in this. Cabinet who is burdened with responsibility, and let no one kid himself.

It is not possible for , one man to be solely responsible for that Department. It is not possible. There are in that caucus some people who have knowledge of Municipal Affairs and other things, and it is only right that the Minis ter be allowed to consult with these people. The. Premier should say yes, go ahad and talk to these people. I believe the Premier has no confidence in these two men, the Member for Carbonear and the Member for Placentia. If he had confidence in them, they would be in Cabinet. If he has no confidence in them, they should he allowed to advise the Minister: who should consult with them. MR.

SPEAKER: Order, please! The hon. Member's time has expired. SOME HON. MEMBERS: By leave! SOME HON. MEMBERS: No leave! No leave! AN HON._MEMBER: Oh, jo on. He is making a fine speech. MR, SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Exploits. MR. GRIMES: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have recognized that one of the most difficult acts to follow in [1 . L38 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R38

the next little while in this House is going to be the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West. There is no doubt in my mind that I am very impressed by his energy and eloquence. In discussions outside, some other Members have been suggesting to me that there might be some question as to the total sense and substance of his remarks, but I do not concur with that; I find everything he says keeps me in my seat. I will sit in my seat for that hon. Member speaking on any issue in this House at any time, no question whatsoever. I am absolutely amazed by the hon.

Member's ability to somehow put together a wide variety of issues and then find a meaningful way to tie them all into the subject being debated, in this case Bill 29. With his experience and his abilities, he is a man 1 admire. I am sure there are people opposite who admire him, and I have heard rumours that there are fund raisers on the go now to raise money for a leadership bid for the hon. the Member for Burin - Placentia West. I will probably even participate in that in some fashion, because I agree with that kind of sentiment.

In no uncertain terms, I hope that in my tenure in the House I c a n come somewhere close to matching the eloquence and energy of the fine hon. gentleman who does a masterful job, and has done a masterful job on at least three occasions, of carrying the load, and carrying the ball for the Members opposite on several important debates. I would like to go on record as commending him for doing exactly that. Some years ago, in relation to Bill 29, Mr.

Speaker, I did hear a nasty rumour that the Merriber for Burin - Placentia West was L39 November 16, 1989 vol XLIS offering himself for a position of Mayor of some community. It was unfortunate that I did not know him personally at the time, because I would have jumped in and helped campaign, and maybe he would still be a Mayor and we would have been spared this session today. With relation to the legislation, Mr.

Speaker, on this fine day in the House, this legislation is important and I will spend just a few minutes - I do not intend to try and speak any more than I have to, but there are a number of points I would like to make, SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. GRIMES: I think some Members were pointing out the last time I spoke, on a Private Member s Bill on Student Aid, that I was so impressive the Students in the galleries left half way through my speech and had I not spoken at that time, maybe they might have stayed around and been here for the conclusion by the hon. the member for Fortune - Hermitage (Mr.

Langdon). With relation to the Bill., I. think we finally see the legitimate combination of all things related to municipalities placed back to where they should be. It is a real pleasure to stand and speak in support of this Bill. I have been one of the members who h a s led n u m e r o u s delegations of my councillors From my district in Exploits into the offices of the Minister of Municipal AFfairs, and some other offices where they had to conduct business, and they find it tremendously useful. They find it, in fact, parallels what they do as a council themselves, in that when they get dec ted to No. 34 R39 .

. councils, which they did just a couple of short days ago, and the House of Assembly has gone on record as commending those people for offering themselves for office, and those who were successful in being elected, they deal with all these issues on behalf of the municipalities, the councils and the communities, MS VERGE: Why have they not (inaudible) in there, too? MR. GRIMES: Mr. Speaker, in my experience in sitting in the galleries some years ago, it was kind of difficult to get the hon. the member for Humber East, who was then a Minister in various portfolios, to say very triuch.

I am pleased to see she is now engaging in debate in a much more lively fashion, and I look forward to seeing lots of that in the years to come, as well.

In fact, the councils that have been in here representing their communities, when they go to work on behalf of the residents in their communities, they do make decisions on a regular basis with this whole range of services, Now we have Municipal and Provincial Affairs together, where it rightfully should be, because there are many communities in Newfoundland and Labrador which have provincial services that are provided within their boundaries, and that they have all kinds of concern for and dealings with.

They have repeatedly said to me that they think it is tremendously sensible and appropriate for them to be able to come into St. John's on one of their delegations and go and get almost all of their concerns addressed in one meeting with one Minister. Sometimes members Opposite, Mr. Speaker, might find that in fact they still are labouring under the notion that every separate Department or Division must have a Minister. Our Ministers spend their time listening to the people and developing policy, and they use their staff to do the functioning of the Departments.

The councils that visit Fr om my district, and I am sure it is not very different from the rest of the districts around Newfoundland and Labrador, find it to be an improvement, the fact that they can get all of the issues that they deal with on a regular basis dealt with in a one—stop meeting with the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. There have been some unfair comments, as well, regarding t h e legislation. I understand people talking about the idea that we just have a little hit of housekeeping legislation and so on, and that happens.

But there are a couple of things about this kind of so—called housekeeping legislation that are very significant. Hon. members opposite would have been delighted in this Session of the House of Assembly to be standing presenting such pieces of legislation.

When the current Leader of the Opposition was Premier, one oft he first things he did with his great transition team was to recognize the error of their ways in times past, when they had expanded Cabinet to some twenty—two or twenty—three, and they had already started the downsizing of Cabinet to, I think, eighteen or nineteen, But I think they probably might have spent a little bit too much time in planning the downsizing and going through that . L40 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 R40

S . transition team process, and never really got a chance, then, to put it in action and in effect. Because, unfortunately, they did not win enough seats in the last election, or fortunately now, as many Newfoundlanders are saying, and they never ever got an opportunity to bring in their housekeeping legislation, which would have explained why they felt only eighteen or nineteen Ministries could have served the people of Newfoundland and Labrador. What we haije, in fact, is legislation that is much like the debate that is going on in the country about Meech Lake.

In fact, you have the underpinnings of the structure of Government being displayed in these bills; you have a foundation and a base that will outline exactly how this Administration, run by Premier Wells and his Cabinet, will operate over the next few years. The rearrangement here in Municipal and Provincial Affairs is only one example of it. The combination is outlined in the explanatory note attached to the bill. It is short in words but very significant in impact, and several of the others are the same.

So we can see that one of the things that happened, of course, is a move towards a real change in creating only Departments that are necessary and functional, and that this bill is one of the necessary bills brought in to accomplish exactly that. I would like for a minute, Mr. Speaker, iF I could, to avail of the opportunity, while addressing Bill 29, to speak briefly about the .issue of amalgamation, which has been seriously misrepresented by the previous speaker, the hon. the Member for l3urin - Placentia West, and also by several other Members of the House opposite.

Amalgamation is, as everybody recognizes in this House, a wonderful concept, and most people find merit with the conept. A process is being put in place now through our Minister which is going to ensure that those people who agree with the concept, and many, many do agree with the basic concept, most people do, will go through a process of full discussion and input, consultation, and we will not have to put up with the skillful twisting of the words by t h e p r e v i o u s speaker, the hon. Member for Burin - Placentia West.

He talks about forced amalgamation, when in fact, the mayors who used the word forced talked about being forced to have another election if they agree to amalgamate. So the word forced was used, but not at all in the context that the House has been led to believe by the prvious speaker. Of course, there is some opposition to the .idea of amalgamation, but it is not opposition to the concept.

When those people voicing opposition have used the word, they have said they are opposed to some OF the suggested groupings but that they would like to go into the consultative process, get involved in the hearings, and maybe propose other groupings that they might he able to agree with. So we have some skillful twisting of the words, but it certainly should he remembered that the record in the House should be clear that those people who supposedly used words like f orced and 'opposed' did not at all use them in the context that the previous speaker would lead us to believe.

Some municipalities did choose not L41 November 16, 1989 vol XLI No. 34 R41

to have elections a couple of days ago because they felt it was in their best interest not to go through another election. It only shows their concern and their interest in the whole notion of amalgamation, that they are willing to actively and seriously consider it now, within the next few months, and that they would spare the taxpayers the expense of an additional election and go ahead with the hearings and hopefully get on with the process. Amalgamation, Mr.

Speaker, is just one of the areas where, if in fact there are successful transitions made to larger amalgamated centers than what we now have, it will be another example of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians being a little better off than we are presently. We are getting a little better off all the time; we are still not perfect.

And I would like to point out that I think most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians are certainly still very proud to be Newfoundland Canadians, and are not at all in a position to share the sentiment expressed by the Leader of the Opposition less than a week ago, when in this House he suggested that maybe we would all be better off if we were never part of Confederation, a statment which shocked residents in Exploits District when they heard it; the fact that in the House of Assembly the Leader of the Opposition, who only a few short months ago was the Premier, stated out loud on the record, in Hansard, that in his opinion we may indeed be better off if we were not part of Canada.

You will find very few Newfoundlanders today who would ever, ever utter those words or come anywhere close to agreeing with that kind of sentiment. And with it you will find that here in Bill 29, we just have another opportunity of making sure that we advance the cause for residents of communities throughout the Province, both the Island part and the Labrador part, to make sure that we are a little better off than we had been before, because we have been making conti nual progress s i n c e Confederation, in 1949. I just wanted to make those Few comments, Mr.

Speaker, I have no, intention of going on for the sake of speaking and filling up the rest of the allowable time, hut I did want to speak to this bill, and just be there long enough to say that I, as a Member on this side, certainly am very proud to be able to stand and speak to this major piece of reorganizational legislation being introduced into this Chamber by the Minister of Municipal and Provincial Affairs. Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker; SOME HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear! MR. SPEAKER: The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl. MR. WINDSOR: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I guess I only have nine minutes to speak to this bill before we get to the Late Show. I do want to address the bill for a few moments, and I do want to address the bill, to the surprise of some people, even though there is not much you can argue about the bill. as it relates to the legislation. It really does riot change a great deal; it amalgamates, as the M i n i s t e r of Arnaig amation 5 IS amalgamating a bunch of departments . That is about all it [1 L42 November 16, 1989 Vol XLI No. 34 R42

S L a . does, and that is enough, Mr Speaker. Previous speakers have made mention of the incredible workload the Minister has under his responsibilities, and the Minister will confirm that when he was appointed I congratulated him and gave him my sympathies. I said to him at that time that it is physically impossible to do a good job; you will do a job, but you cannot do a good job with such a broad range of responsibilities. Mr. Speaker, I think we should think for a moment about just what the responsibilities are that the Minister has.

Municipal Affairs itself has always been and always will be one of the busiest portfolios of Government. Municipal Affairs itself is enough responsibility, caring for the requirements of 310 municipalities and local service district and so forth. Now, maybe all that is included in 310, but there are a tremendous number of people out there who want to see the Minister on a regular basis. All 310 of them will sometime want to come in, and he will find, if he has not found it up until now, that over the next month he is going to be very busy.

The councils will be coming in to do their Christmas shopping, and they will be wanting to see the Minister at the same time. So he is going to have a lineup outside his door every day from now until Christmas, I can assure you. It happens every year. It is always a good time to go to St. Johns to see th Minister. Mr. Speaker, Municipal Affairs is a very important portfolio. There are a lot of problems, and I appreciate that the Minister is trying to deal with some of the problems that are being experienced by municipalities today.

I will talk about amalgamation perhaps a little later, but probably I will not have time. In a few days time, I assume we will get to Bill No. 12. We do not have a copy of that Bill yet, but I assume that will be the one that gives the Minister some more powers to do certain things and deal speciFically with amalgamation, I do not know, This one does not give him any additional power. But there is a whole range of responsibilities that he h a s to deal with in that portfolio, and I think that really is a full—time job. Now,